MCFly reader (from back when we were fortnightly!) Jamie Fisher writes about another road, which is clearly what the planet needs right about now…

What’s happening?

The current A556 is a major dual carriageway from Chester to the M56 near Altrincham, crossing the M6 at junction 19. A significant amount of traffic uses the section of the road through Tabley and Mere to link between the two motorways. Over the past decade or more several plans have been put forward to try and address the traffic issues and congestion.
With the recession and reduced budgets, the project appeared to be under threat.
But in autumn 2011 the government announced the A556 was one of 500 major build projects it hopes will be financed through a public-private national infrastructure plan.

The route, inevitably termed an “Environmental Improvement Scheme” , proposes to build an entirely new 7.5km stretch of road running from junction 19 of the M6 to just before junction 7 of the M56. Roughly parallel to the existing A556, this would be constructed on what is currently greenbelt land.

The plan envisages replacing one section of four lane dual carriageway with a brand new version. Overall capacity on this busy stretch will not be increased, and the existing A556 will be reduced to a two lane road through Tabley and Mere for local traffic use only, and will not be connected to the motorway junctions.

Both the existing A556 and the new route lie in the parliamentary constituency of the Chancellor George Osborne, who approved the plans for it to go ahead as a major infrastructure project for the region in his 2011 autumn statement.

What are the timescales?

The scheme is currently progressing through the preliminary design stage, which involves a 12 week consultation with local residents, businesses etc. This consultation is scheduled to end on 16th April and anyone can submit a response via the Highways Agency’s website.

After that date, the Highways Agency says they will assess the consultation feedback, undertake further design development and submit an application to the Infrastructure Planning Commission who will then examine it before making a recommendation to the Secretary of State on whether to grant permission to proceed into the construction phase. The Planning Act 2008 major infrastructure projects planning process is scheduled to take place during 2013.

The Highways Agency’s website indicates construction will begin by 2015 and take approximately two years.

What is the reason for the road?

The Highways Agency’s own projections place the cost between a minimum of £137million and a maximum of £212million. Their website claims “A new road will address the significant congestion problems and will reduce accident numbers within the area. The air quality within the area will also be improved”.

What are the arguments against?

Transport
One of the main arguments against the road is that it does not address the Highways Agency’s own reasons for construction. It is scheduled to cost hundreds of millions of pounds, at a time when huge reductions in public spending are taking place, but does not alleviate congestion or significantly reduce journey time. It simply replaces one four lane dual carriageway with a brand new one. Overall capacity will not be increased, as the existing A556 through Tabley and Mere will be reduced to a two lane road for local traffic, which is not connected to the motorway junctions.

The argument is that this massively expensive scheme will simply transfer congestion, accidents and poor air quality onto the new road a few hundred metres to the west. In other words it is not a sustainable project.

Campaigners argue that there are cheaper and more effective solutions, particularly improving the M6/M56 interchange at junction 20 near Warrington or seeking to reduce road traffic by creating better rail links from Manchester to the M6.

Environment
The local action group have highlighted the significant destruction of hedgerows, trees, farmland and historic landscapes that construction will lead to. It will blight the homes and surrounding countryside of hundreds of people who lie in its route.

The Highways Agency have already carried out an extensive environmental impact assessments which fully detail the massive ecological and landscape damage which will occur during construction, including the loss of significant mature woodland, sites of biological importance and ancient parkland. A large scale mitigation programme is proposed including the relocation of populations of Great Crested Newts.

Finance
The A556 is one of 500 major build projects which the coalition government which George Osborne has said will be financed through a public-private national infrastructure plan. This will be supported with £5bn of public money, but Osborne has said the rest of the cost will be sought from pension funds or the likes of sovereign wealth funds of foreign countries. George Osborne has recently been on a tour of Asian countries including China to seek investment in UK infrastructure, and other ministers have toured those well known havens of democracy, the Gulf.

The 500 are ranked in order of priority with funding guaranteed for a number of high priority projects. Unfortunately this includes the plans for the A556. The public funding, which the Chancellor will be provided by cuts made to other areas of public finances, including to tax credit payments. Investment from foreign countries would see the profits repatriated abroad in the manner of privately owned utilities. In addition road projects are notorious for large cost overruns. Recent PPP schemes in the NHS and schools sector under New Labour have proved to be vastly more expensive than if the state had built them directly, and saddled the tax payer with long term repayments.

Local response

Many local residents are opposed to the scheme. An action group has been established and a website set up which gives much greater detail of the plans and the reasons why the new road is financially and environmentally senseless.
They are seeking to raise at least £7,000 to engage a specialist transport consultancy to review the evidence. They are also seeking volunteers to help leaflet drop, lobby their MP, etc.

How can I get involved?

Activists are planning a long term campaign against the scheme. The first public meeting was held on Thursday 23rd February.
Attendees were urged to write to the Infrastructure Planning Commission before 16th April listing a number of inadequacies in the Highways Agency consultation and their plans. The points to make are laid out in a guidance note which was circulated at the meeting and can be downloaded from the action group’s website. For further information and details of the action group visit:

6 Responses to Road to Ruin? The A556…

Lots of woodland needs defending. Ideal for camps, lets shame George Osborne who seems hell bent on building this road, the only beneficiaries of which seem to be the construction company backers of The Conservative Party….

You are so right
Everyone should write to the infrastructure planning Commission Temple Quay House Temple Quay Bristol BS1 6PN for the Attention of Kathryn Powell Case Manager and to the Right Hon George Osborn MP and David Cameron objecting to this crazy unnecassary development which will destroy wildlife and irreplaceable greenbelt l and be no better than the existing road and cost us the taxpayers millions what about schools the NHS and vital Public Services we dont need another road what happend to reducing emissions and Global warming?

The main environmental damage would be done to the Rostherne Mere. This would be poluted by run off as the drains must be able to discharge to a basin close by. Rosetherne Mere is protected. It is a Ramsar site. This is a status far beyond SSI. One should also realise the aims and objectives of the project when the public inquiry was They said the aim was to reduce journey times. Is this not the same as saying people should drive as fast as they possibly can to reduce congestion. This is the opposite to the means used on the M25. No one can say one thing works on one stretch of road but not another.
The cheapest way to decrease the journey time is to knock down the homes on the left of the road and widening it to allow a central reservation and bridges in the place where now there are traffic lights. This would also negate the problem of deciding if this plan is better than that one. Those who support this construction are those who live beside the exisiting road.

I am a Doctor, working in Manchester & living in Millington. The proposed road makes NO logical or pactical sense what so ever & the motives can therefore only be political & purely for the benefit of the few who live in Mere.
It is obvious that to resolve this probelm one needs to look at the whole picture. At peak times there ar ALWAYS traffic queues from Junction 7 of the M56 right up to Manchester, Construction of the porposed road will simply move the traffic faster to this junction & increase the queue far to the west of this junction. This will exaturate the problem rather then solving it.

If the intention is genuinely to solve the traffic problem & increase road safety, then surely the traffic problem on the M56 & the M6 which have been under review for a long time MUST FIRST BE FULLY RESOLVED BEFORE EVEN THE SLIGHTEST PRACTICAL JUSTIFICATION CAN BE MADE for the proposed new road.

The environmental costs are deliberately manipulated NOT to show the true picture & the huge problems that will result from the use of single lane country roads currently used by local farmer for moving cattle & farming machinery, for horse riding…etc & on which 2 cars can NOT pass side by side, are not fully studied & under estimated.
Turning a road ( A556) that has for MANY DECADES been a major dual carriage way into a 2 lane country lane going no where just to please a few affluent local residents & spending close to £200m of tax payers money on a totally unnecessary bypass which is likely to create more problems than it solves with huge environmental costs SEEMS TOTALLY SHAMEFUL.

NO ONE DENIES THAT THE M556 PROBLEM NEEDS TO BE RESOLVED BUT THERE ARE MANY MUCH LESS COSTLY ALTERNATIVES THAT HAVE BEEN PLAYED DOWN, THESE INCLUDE USING JUNCTION 20, CONTROLLING & RESTRICTING THE USE OF THE A556, INTRODUCING SPEED RETARDING RAMPS……..ETC.
THERE MUST BE A TOTALLY INDEPENDENT HOLISTIC REVIEW OT THE PROBLEM WITHOUT ANY POLITICAL INFLUENCE OR MOTIVATION TO FIND A LASTING SOLUTION WHICH DOES JUSTICE TO THE LOCAL COUNTRY SIDE, LOCAL RESIDENTS & THE TAX PAYER.
Dr M Salehi

Utter lunacy to desecrate hundreds of acres of prime Cheshire agricultural land, and greenbelt wildlife habitat, simply in order to duplicate what’s already there – minus the large houses and golf club. If the A556 wasn’t signposted as a shortcut from the M6 to the M56, some of the current congestion could be alleviated. As for safety on the current A556, it’s speed that’s the issue rather than volume. And there are actually far more casualties on some of Cheshire’s “Red Routes” than the A556. Granted, it can’t be fun to live in a house slap-bang-next-door to a four-lane road such as the current A556, but that was the residents’ choice when they chose to move there.

Two Goals for 2015

If you want to be involved - at any level - please email mcmonthly@gmail.com
1) Support and learn from citizens and groups taking local action on climate change and getting ready for the unpleasant changes ahead
2) Work with and support citizens who are constructively and persistently challenging their elected representatives to do a better job on climate change.

Click on here for updated depressing info…

Sample Image

ClicktoVisit

4hiroshimas.com

Email Subscription

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 2,080 other followers

Follow us on Twitter

Ways you can help MCFly

Tell us about upcoming events.
Write reports about events.
Retweet/facebook stuff.
Send us news/gossip etc.
Tell us what skills and knowledge you need to help make Manchester sustainable/ resourceful.
mcmonthly@gmail.com